The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Friday, March 10, 2017

This garbage is accepted as
factual by many Palestinians and other Arabs.

There is no shortage of
Palestinian and Arab news websites that publish hoaxes, propaganda, lies
and disinformation disguised as real news. This garbage is accepted as
factual by many Palestinians and other Arabs.

This is a form of incitement to which the West is deaf, largely
because journalists working for Western mainstream media do not wish to
understand what is being reported in Arabic, or even in English.

Blood libels against Jews were once thought to be part of the
dark past. They are not. What do such stories accomplish? Excuses for
the murder of Jews.

Another "new" old blood libel that Palestinians have been
spreading against Israel claims that Israelis are flooding Palestinian
communities with narcotics in order to spread moral corruption and
destroy the health of Palestinians. This lie helps Palestinians avoid
responsibility for the smuggling of drugs (by Palestinians) into the
West Bank and Gaza Strip from Jordan and Egypt.

That leaves us with some questions: Where is the international
community's exposure of the lies that fuel the Palestinian murder of
Jews? And: Will the international community once again in history fail
to speak the truth about the murder of Jews?

One after another, young Palestinians continue to carry out terrorist
attacks against Jews. Why? We might start at the beginning: the
campaign of incitement, indoctrination and lies that Palestinian media
outlets wage against Israel. This campaign has poisoned the hearts and
minds of millions of Arabs and Muslims. It ought to be no surprise,
then, when the poisoned Palestinian youths grab a weapon and set out to
do the death-work they are taught to cherish.

The anti-Israel incitement can even be quite subtle. Those injecting
the venom do not always issue a direct call for Palestinians to go out
and kill Jews. It is enough, for example,
to tell Palestinians that Jews are "defiling with their filthy feet"
Islamic holy sites, to drive a Palestinian to go out and stab a Jew.

Or when a Palestinian leaders repeatedly accuse Israel of seeking to "Judaize" Jerusalem
and change its "Arab and Islamic character." This is like urging
Palestinians to "defend" their city against Israel's "evil
conspiracies."

The vicious rhetoric and the fairy tales they feed Palestinians provide ample incentive and ideology for would-be terrorists.

While Palestinian mosque preachers, political activists, journalists
and senior officials have long been preoccupied with the mission of
delegitimizing Israel and demonizing Jews, other Palestinians also
fabricate "news" in order to further the Israeli death count.

The epidemic of "fake news" and "alternative facts," which has
recently flooded the internet, is not new to Palestinian culture. In
fact, "fake news" has long been an essential component of the
Palestinian campaign to delegitimize Israel, demonize Jews and even to
cite false claims. Historically, for example, Jordan illegally seized
Jerusalem and the West Bank in the 1948 war and proceeded to ethnically
cleanse the area of Jews; in the 1967 war, the Israelis merely took their land back.

The head of Apple, Tim Cook, was recently quoted as saying, "Fake news is killing people's minds."

Palestinians have long been fed fake news. It is a tried and true
method for recruiting terrorists and jihadists in the fight against
Israel and Jews. As, in Islam, jihad is allowed to "defend Islam," narratives sometimes have to be provided to give the impression that Islam is being attacked.

There is no shortage of Palestinian and Arab news websites that
publish hoaxes, propaganda, lies and disinformation disguised as real
news. This garbage is accepted as factual by many Palestinians and other
Arabs.

This is another form of incitement to which the West is deaf, largely
because journalists working for Western mainstream media do not wish to
understand what is being reported in Arabic, or even in English. These
journalists either deliberately turn a blind eye to this indoctrination
or underestimate how it deforms the hearts and minds of Palestinians.

Take, for example, a recent story
published on Palestinian news websites, claiming that Israel has been
spraying agricultural fields in the Gaza Strip with pesticides.
According to the report, Israel uses planes to destroy Palestinian
agricultural products in order to ruin the Palestinian economy and
deprive farmers of their livelihood.

Last week, some Palestinian news websites came up with a story
that sounds as if it were lifted straight from an action movie. What do
such stories accomplish? Excuses for the murder of Jews.

The story goes as follows: "An Israeli plane dropped suspicious
objects that look like candies near the Palestinian city of Jenin in the
northern West Bank." According to the report, Palestinians who examined
the "candies" discovered that they contained toxic material. In other
words: Israel is seeking to poison Palestinian children. Is it any
wonder when a Palestinian teenager who hears such a story runs out to
murder Jews, as in Petah Tikva last month, when a 19-year-old
Palestinian shot and stabbed several Israelis.

Another recently resurrected old blood libel that Palestinians have
been spreading against Israel claims that Israelis are flooding
Palestinian communities with narcotics in order to spread moral
corruption and destroy the health of Palestinian youths. This particular
lie helps the Palestinians avoid responsibility for the smuggling of
drugs (by Palestinians) into the West Bank and Gaza Strip from Jordan
and Egypt.

At a recent seminar in the Gaza Strip, a group of Palestinian "experts" claimed
that "hidden parties backed by Israel" were responsible for "drowning
the Gaza Strip with various types of lethal and dangerous drugs."

Similar false charges were made by the Palestinian police in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip last year.

Ayman Al-Batnihi, a police spokesman in Gaza City, went as far as claiming
that the widespread use of narcotics was the product of an Israeli
"conspiracy" to destroy Palestinian youths and prevent them from
engaging in the fight against Israel. Needless to say, the spokesman,
like the Palestinian news websites, never provides any evidence to back
up his false claims.

The libels and lies are not coming from Hamas alone. The Palestinian
Authority (PA), which relies almost solely on American and European
funding, offers similar "information" to its readers. Here is a news report that appeared in the PA's Ramallah-based Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda
newspaper, claiming that Israel is "flooding" the Arab residents of
Jerusalem with narcotics. The report claims that some 20,000 Arabs have
fallen victim to the purported Israeli "conspiracy" and have become drug
addicts. "Israel's goal is to destroy the Arab youths of Jerusalem and
empty the city of its Arab inhabitants," the report went on to explain.

According to reports
such as these, Jews also supposedly use pigs to persecute Palestinians.
Palestinian news websites regularly inform their readers that Israel
releases wild pigs in the West Bank to destroy Palestinian crops and
drive Palestinians out of their homes. The wild pigs, the reports tell
Palestinians, are brought by Jews to Palestinian villages as part of a
scheme to destroy the crops and intimidate villagers (some of whom claim
the wild pigs attack them). An interesting facet of this "fake news" is
that the Jewish settlers accused of using pigs to wage war against
Palestinians are mostly religious, the last people in the world
interested in getting involved with swine.

This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the lies about
Israelis that Palestinians are fed daily by their leaders, journalists
and media outlets. This is also what Palestinians think of when they
pick up a knife to thrust into the body of a Jew.

Blood libels against Jews were once thought to be part of the dark
past. They are not. That leaves us with some questions: Where is the
international community's exposure of the lies that fuel the Palestinian
murder of Jews? And: Will the international community once again in
history fail to speak the truth about the murder of Jews?

Bassam Tawil is a scholar based on the Middle East.Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9962/palestinians-fake-news Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Stopping the indoctrination of our children is a necessary first step.

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The first eight weeks of Trump’s administration have been filled with executive orders attacking the unconstitutional excesses of the Obama presidency. He’s also pledged to kill the regulatory Hydra, increase defense spending, reform the tax code, and restore America’s prestige. And all these changes and promises have been met with vicious attacks and outlandish charges from the media, and scorched-earth obstructionism from Congressional Dems.

All of which is as entertaining as an MMA blood-fest. But to effect real change, we need to get beneath the telegenic food-fight and transient click-bait, and start dynamiting the foundations of the deep state. And that means going after higher education, the one institution that more than any other shapes the young and indoctrinates them with progressive ideology.

But it’s not enough to go after the ideologically biased professoriate and administrators, or ridicule the pretentious “research” churned out by pseudo-disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. No doubt such critical exposure of the “higher nonsense” is important, for those bad ideas trickle down from the research universities to the state colleges, where most of the K-12 teachers get their teaching credentials. And most of those teachers inflict these political prejudices and false knowledge on the impressionable young, who by the time they reach college will already have been primed for even more pernicious indoctrination.

Take, for example, the silly notion of “microagressions.” This is the preposterous idea that systemic racism, sexism, etc. are so pervasive that people can subconsciously inflict injury on women, homosexuals, “people of color,” and all the other certified victims due special treatment like “safe spaces.” This wacky idea got started back in 2007 with a scientifically dubious paper called “Racial Microagressions in Everyday Life.” An even more influential bad idea, “Islamophobia,” traces its origins to Edward Said’s 1978 Orientalism, a “work of malignant charlatanry,” as Middle East scholar Robert Irwin described it, and one of the most-assigned books in social science and humanities courses. Like bacilli, such ideological prejudices disguised as scholarship have infected curricula from grade school to university, and from there sickened the whole culture. And they replicate themselves through the education industry’s monopoly on training, hiring, and tenuring of teachers.

Beyond this sort of research, however, lies the mother of all bad ideas, “diversity.” This pseudo-concept became part of national law in the 1978 Bakkevs. University of California case. In the Bakke decision, Justice Lewis Powell promulgated the idea that a vaguely defined “diversity” could justify racial discrimination in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s ban on–– racial discrimination. How? Because “diversity” along with its alleged pedagogical benefits is a “compelling state interest.” Yet despite the continuing failure to specifically identity, define, or empirically substantiate this “state interest” or its benefits, the Supreme Court has continued to justify race-based policies by invoking “diversity.” Backed by the highest court in the land, promoting “diversity” now has become the dominant policy in nearly all colleges and universities. The result has been the institutionalizing of an illiberal identity politics that corrupts curricula, compromises liberal education’s traditional mission to promote “the free play of the mind on all subjects,” stifles free speech, and privileges politically selected “victims.”

Another example of how the deep state polices institutions to ensure their compliance with progressive ideology is the unconstitutional and unjust campus tribunals created to adjudicate claims of “sexual misconduct.” Robert L. Shibley, the executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has explained how the political corruption of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act has put the coercive, fiscal, and investigative power of the Department of Education behind ideologically based violations of the Constitution.

In 2011, the DOE’s Office of Civil Rights sent universities a “dear colleague” letter offering “guidance” about how schools should handle charges of sexual assault. As Shibley points out, the term “guidance” allows the agency to skirt the Administrative Procedure Act’s requirements that new agency regulations must notify those affected by the new rules and allow them time to comment. Thus the OCR in effect created two new laws, usurping the law-making powers of Congress. One allows both sides in a complaint to appeal the outcome of the proceedings, creating the possibility of double jeopardy if the accused is found guilty. Second, colleges have to use the “preponderance of evidence” standard, basically 50.01 percent certainty, when determining guilt, in contrast to the criminal justice system’s “beyond a reasonable doubt standard, a 98-99 percent certainty.

The result has been campus tribunals that violate the canons of justice and due process, leading to travesties of justice such as the falsely accused Duke lacrosse team, or the fake rape story published by Rolling Stone. In fact, the system is designed to be unfair. Administrators choose who presides over the hearing and who will be jurors––mostly other administrators with a vested interest in the outcome. Neither party has a right to counsel, cross-examination, or examination of the evidence, which can include even hearsay. As Shibley writes, “Such a system is not, by any stretch of the imagination, just, fair, or equitable.”

And huge difficulties face the unfortunate student found guilty who wants to sue, for his future in higher education could be compromised by allegations even if later proven false. Colleges and universities also have standing to sue, but either are ideologically committed to the politicizing of sexual encounters between adults, or fear the ever-present threat that the DOE can withhold federal money––$76 billion in 2013–– from colleges and universities that fall afoul of the agency’s diktats. Such leverage is so powerful that only one school, Oklahoma Wesleyan University, has filed suit against a Dear Colleague Letter.

The solution to this corruption of both the Constitution and the mission of liberal education is for Congress to pass legislation that reforms Title IX and corrects the over-vague and elastic language that gives the DOE scope for such bureaucratic tyranny. Yes, the DOE’s latest assault, the 2016 “Dear Colleague Letter” mandating that students can use whatever restroom fits their assumed sex identity, was suspended by Trump’s Executive order. But that’s a temporary fix that doesn’t get at the root of the problem, which goes beyond one federal agency. Congress must step up and reclaim its Constitutional right to make the laws. For just as appeasement begets appeasement, ignoring deep-state violations of the Constitution will create even more. The DOE’s tyranny permeates the federal bureaucracy, as we’ve seen under Obama with the politicizing of the IRS, the DOJ, and the intelligence community. That’s to be expected from a regulatory leviathan staffed by unaccountable partisan functionaries that every day encroaches on the Constitutional rights of American citizens and compromises their freedom.

It is easy to put a low priority on our how progressive ideology has corrupted higher education, and spend our time and energy on reforming the tax code or reining in the EPA. But remember the Jesuit maxim: “Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.” Education today gets children at five, and in some cases continues to mold them until they’re 21. Changing the laws that empower bureaucratic ideologues to indoctrinate our children is the necessary first step to dismantling deep-state tyranny.

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, a Research
Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, and a Professor of Classics and
Humanities at the California State University. He is the author of nine
books and numerous essays on classical culture and its influence on
Western Civilization. His most recent book, Democracy's Dangers and Discontents (Hoover Institution Press), is now available for purchase.Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266015/if-you-want-real-change-start-education-bruce-thornton Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Michael Herzog is not a
right-wing ideologue, and when his narrative undermines core beliefs of
the global "consensus" against Israel regarding the diplomatic process
-- and it does -- this should be noted.

Because the news is
elsewhere, few have bothered to pay attention to the insider expose on
the "Kerry peace process" published in The American Interest late last
month by Brig. Gen. (res.) Michael Herzog. This is unfortunate, since
Herzog blows many peace process myths to smithereens, and reveals both
the artifice of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the
chicanery of former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

Herzog is a veteran
Israeli peace processer, having participated in most of Israel's
negotiations with the Palestinians, Syrians and Jordanians since 1993.
He processed peace, or tried to, for Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin, Ehud
Barak, Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu, and worked closely with
Tzipi Livni too. He was part of the Wye, Camp David, Taba, Annapolis and
Kerry rounds of negotiation. He is also the brother of Zionist Union
leader and Labor Party chairman Yitzhak Herzog.

So Herzog is not a
right-wing ideologue, and when his narrative undermines core beliefs of
the global "consensus" against Israel regarding the diplomatic process
-- and it does -- this should be noted.

Herzog details the ups
and down of the process led in 2013-2014 by Kerry, and layers this on
the background of both public and secret talks that had been held
previously. While he tries to be politically correct -- apportioning
some blame on all sides for the failure of the effort, crediting Kerry
for his commitment, and adhering to doctrine about two states being the
"only" solution possible -- Herzog nevertheless bulldozes a ton of stale
assumptions and false narratives.

Firstly, Herzog tells
us that, contrary to what just about every world leader seems to think,
Prime Minister Netanyahu was extraordinarily serious about negotiating
peace with the Palestinian Authority, and he made significant
concessions in the process; so much so, that he still dares not admit
the details to the Israeli public and to his current coalition partners.

It is nevertheless
clear from Herzog's telling (and from previous pieces, such as the 2014
New Republic expose by Ben Birnbaum and Amir Tibon) that Netanyahu was
ready to withdraw from vast tracts of Judea and Samaria to facilitate
Palestinian statehood, venturing "well outside his natural comfort
zone."

Secondly, Herzog makes
it clear that Abbas did not really want an agreement of any sort,
period. He was in the process to cry on the shoulders of then U.S.
President Barack Obama and Kerry about Palestinian rights; to pocket
concessions from Israel without being willing himself to compromise on
any concrete issue or sign on any dotted lines; and to ensure failure of
the talks with blame heaped on Israel, and thus justify breaking
previous Palestinian commitments.

Abbas pretended to
negotiate before "losing interest"; used Hamas to doom the talks; and
ran to international institutions to criminalize and isolate Israel with
failed talks as his excuse. He still expects the international
community to "deliver" Israeli withdrawals on a silver platter, without
tying the hands of the Palestinian state to any concrete end-game
commitments.

Thirdly, Herzog makes
it clear that it is simply not true -- not even remotely -- that the
parameters for a settlement between Israel and Palestinians are
"well-known," "clear," "obvious," and "within easy reach" if only brave
leaders step forward.

"Unlike some simplistic
notions out there," writes Herzog, and despite 20 years of Oslo-era
peace processing, "the gaps are significant and widened by the weight of
history, religion, emotions, and domestic politics."

Fourthly, the most
interesting and disturbing of Herzog's revelations relate to the
disastrous negotiating dynamics dictated by John Kerry.

To begin with, Kerry
drove the notion that there was a constant need to reward Abbas for
coming to, and staying at, the negotiating table. This fed Palestinian
appetites, and allowed Abbas to continually blackmail the U.S. and
Israel for concessions and sweeteners (like the release of Palestinian
terrorists from Israel jails).

Then when the talks
reached a stalemate, Kerry's approach was again to reward the
Palestinians for their obduracy (by moving American goalposts on the
issues and begging Abbas to stay engaged), and to punish Israel for its
flexibility (by pressuring Netanyahu for more sweeteners and concrete
concessions).

In fact, according to
Herzog, Israel began to realize that Kerry was negotiating mainly with
and against Israel, while conducting substantially no such parallel
process with Abbas. When the crunch came and it was finally time to prod
Abbas into accepting a proposed U.S. framework for continuing the
talks, "it was too little too late. Abu Mazen (Abbas) has shut down ...
no longer interested or invested in the process."

In other words, the
gullible Kerry "discovered" only at the end of the process that Abbas
had been stringing him along with no intention of budging.

(Herzog also charges
Kerry with near-messianic hubris, bull-in-a-china-shop behavior,
mismanagement, and deliberate misrepresentation of Israeli positions;
all fodder for future analysis. And in my view, Herzog does so much too
softly).

Fifth, up against Abbas
in "shutdown mode," Obama and Kerry offered-up significant concessions
to Abbas in a desperate attempt to re-engage him.

This involved "new
ideas and formulations that departed from traditional official U.S.
positions and tilted towards Abbas' positions (including an explicit
confirmation of a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem and equivalent land
swaps) -- positions that were never shared with Israel."

What happened next?
Abbas walked away without acceding to America's entreaties, knowing full
well that Obama would never blame him for failure of the process, and
knowing that America's new positions were essentially in his pocket.

And then, sure enough,
Kerry enunciated these moves away from Israel as official Obama
administration policy, when he harangued Israel (and not the
Palestinians) in an overwrought 70-minute sermon at the State Department
in December.

Sixth and perhaps most
importantly, Herzog lays bare American unfairness to Israel on the
settlement issue. When he testified before Congress, Kerry publicly
blamed Israeli housing starts in the territories for the failure of his
negotiating effort. I worked so hard to bring peace, he wailed, and then
poof, the entire effort went up in smoke because of Netanyahu's damned
settlements.

Kerry's venality here
is plain. Herzog makes it clear that Netanyahu never promised to freeze
settlement construction for the duration of the talks. On the contrary:
Israel had fully informed Kerry it would announce construction of up to
1,500 housing units beyond the Green Line to coincide with every phase
of terrorist releases. This was the price of getting the very
controversial and dangerous prisoner releases through the Israeli
cabinet.

In other words, having
improperly promised Abbas and foisted upon Israel these prisoner
releases, Kerry knew that some construction in settlement blocs adjacent
to the 1967 line (in areas that even Palestinian maps in previous
negotiations indicated would be part of Israel) would follow. Abbas knew
this too, and they both went along with this. So, settlements certainly
were not the main reason behind the failure of the talks, Herzog
writes. And yet, Kerry's "poof" vindictively and falsely pinned the
failure on settlement activity; an American crime against Israel that
has skewed the global diplomatic narrative ever since.

In the end, Herzog's
essay is more than an impeachment of Obama and Kerry. It is an
indictment of the overall Oslo paradigm (even though Herzog won't say
this himself).

His essay makes it
obvious that, alas, the Palestinian Authority under Abbas is not a
"willing or capable" peace partner for the visible future; isn't truly
seeking an end of conflict and all outstanding claims; and its
bottom-line is nowhere near that of even the most flexible Israeli
government.

Therefore, it is time for a new approach in dealing with the conflict.

"The sea changes in
relations between major Arab states and Israel," concludes Herzog, allow
for emergence of a solution strategy "in a broader regional context."

David M. WeinbergSource: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=18577 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

It is becoming more and more difficult in France to hide the fact
that hate speech and anti-Semitic statements are coming mainly not from
non-Muslims, but from French Muslims.

Since Bensoussan rejected
"any idea of destiny or essentialization," the judges denied any
possibility that he could "be accused of having aroused or wished to
arouse a feeling of hostility or rejection against a group of people
[Muslims]".

The Islamist CCIF said it would appeal the decision.

It is becoming more and more difficult in France to hide the fact
that hate speech and anti-Semitic statements are coming mainly not from
non-Muslims, but from French Muslims.

On January 25, 2017, all of France's "anti-racist" organizations --
even the Jewish International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism
(LICRA) -- joined the Islamist Collective Against Islamophobia (CCIF) in
court against Bensoussan. He was prosecuted for remarks he made in
October 2015, during a debate on radio station France Culture about
anti-Semitism among French Arabs. Benoussan said:

"An Algerian sociologist, Smaïn Laacher, with great
courage, just said in a documentary aired on Channel 3: It is a shame to
deny this taboo, namely that in the Arab families in France, and
everyone knows it but nobody wants to say it, anti-Semitism is sucked
with mother's milk."

The Islamist CCIF send the quote to the public prosecutor, who opened
a case against Bensoussan. The charge was simple: "mother's milk" was
not a metaphor for cultural anti-Semitism transmitted through education,
but a genetic and "essentialist" accusation. "Mother's milk", they
claimed, means: "all Arabs are anti-Semitic" -- in other words, that
Bensoussan supposedly a racist.

The decision of the court to acquit of Bensoussan is a key moment for
freedom of speech in France in general, and for the freedom to speak
about Muslim anti-Semitism in France.

The judges said
that "the impugned remarks [of Bensoussan] were held in a very
particular context" -- a radio debate on a hot topic, "in the heat of
conversation". The judges recognized that the quotation of Smaïn Laacher
by the defendant was not strictly accurate. Laacher said:

"it is a monumental hypocrisy not to see that this
anti-Semitism is in the beginning domestic, and quite evidently, is
without doubt reinforced, hardened, legitimized, almost naturalized with
various distinctions... externally. He will find it at home and will
sense no radical lack of continuity between home and the external
environment. Because the external environment, is, in reality, the most
often [experienced]. It is to be found in what are termed the ghettos,
it feels as though it is in the air one breathes, it is not at all
strange. And it is difficult to escape from it in those places,
particularly when you find it in yourself."

According to the judges, however, "the idea expressed by Smaïn
Laacher is almost the same, or even identical to that expressed by
Georges Bensoussan."

"Lastly and above all," according to the court, "the offense of
incitement to hatred, violence or discrimination presupposes to be
constituted, an intentional element," and the characterization of this
intent is lacking and "runs against the fact that Georges Bensoussan...
never ceased to deplore this constitution of two separate peoples
[Muslims and non-Muslims in France]... and never called for a separation
of the faction [Muslims] supposed to have seceded, its rejection, its
banishment or its eradication, but on the contrary, [Bensoussan called]
for their reintegration into the French nation."

Since Bensoussan rejected "any idea of destiny or essentialization,"
the judges denied any possibility that he could "be accused of having
aroused or wished to arouse a feeling of hostility or rejection against a
group of people [Muslims]".

The Islamist CCIF said it would appeal the decision.

It is becoming more and more difficult in France to hide the fact
that hate speech and anti-Semitic statements are coming mainly not from
non-Muslims, but from French Muslims.

Yves Mamouis a journalist and author based in France. He worked for two decades for the daily, Le Monde, before his retirement.Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10025/france-muslim-racism-antisemitism Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

President Donald Trump decided, after
consulting with Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security
Adviser H.R. McMaster, that the US army would go it alone in the Raqqa
offensive together with a single local force: the Kurdish-led Syrian
Democratic Forces.

debkafile’s military and intelligence sources disclose that elements of the 75th
Ranger Regiment have arrived in Syria for the Trump administration’s
first direct military operation in Syria: the long-delayed offensive to
capture Raqqa from the Islamic State. The plan was put before the US, Russian and Turkish chiefs of staff who
were getting together for the first time on Tuesday, March 7, in the
Turkish town of Antalya, as revealed earlier on this site.

Rangers Regiment troops, which will spearhead the Raqqa attack, flew
in from Fort Lewis air base, Washington, to the US air facility in
Rmeilan, near the Syrian Kurdish town of Hasaka, equipped with light
Striker tanks. More tanks and heavy equipment reached the Syrian base
overland from Iraqi Kurdistan.
According to our sources, President Donald Trump decided, after
consulting with Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security
Adviser H.R. McMaster, that the US army would go it alone in the Raqqa
offensive together with a single local force: the Kurdish-led Syrian
Democratic Forces.

The SDF is composed of 45,000 fighters of the Syrian Kurdish YPG
militia and 10,000 Arab tribesmen, most belonging to the north Syrian
branch of the Shamar.

Gen. Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the US Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Valery
Gerasimov, Russian Chief of Staff, and Gen. Hulusi Akar, Turkish army
chief, were conferring in Antalya when the Rangers landed in Syria.
DEBKA Weekly, which comes out on Friday, March 10, will provide the
background leading up to the US president’s decision to go for Raqqa.

If you are not yet a subscriber, click here for this and other exclusive stories.debkaFileSource: http://debka.com/article/25955/US-troops-land-in-Syria-to-launch-Raqqa-operation Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The hate-filed worldview and agendas of the student group MEChA.

The Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA), or “Chicano Student Movement,” describes itself as an organization that urges young Chicanos (people of Mexican ancestry living in the United States) to use “higher education” and “political involvement” to promote “cultural and historical pride,” “liberation,” and “self-determination” among their people. In practice, MEChA aggressively promotes anti-Americanism and anti-white hatred by relentlessly stoking the fires of racial and ethnic grievance among Latino students.
MEChA's roots can be traced back to the Chicano Movement of the late 1960s, which emphasized “brown pride” while rejecting “acculturation and assimilation” into the American mainstream. In that milieu, the first National Chicano Youth Liberation Conference, organized by an entity called Crusade for Justice, was held in Denver, Colorado in March 1969. Participants in this conference drafted the basic premises for the “Chicana/Chicano Movement” in a seminal document titled El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán (EPEA), which today is required reading for all members of MEChA's various chapters.
The term “Aztlán” refers to the territory in the Southwestern United States—including California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, as well as parts of Nevada, Utah, and Colorado—that Mexico ceded to the United States in 1848 via the Treaty of Guadalupe de Hidalgo. But Mexican separatists consider this region to be part of a mythical Aztec homeland that was stolen from its rightful owners. Proceeding from that premise, MEChA rejects the notion that any Chicano can be considered an illegal immigrant. A popular slogan that surfaces at many MEChA rallies is: “We didn't cross the border. The border crossed us.” Claiming that “Aztlán belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans,” EPEAstipulates that the “Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán” are a “sovereign” and “indigenous people” who are “not subject to a foreign culture,” and are now “reclaiming the land of our birth (Chicana/Chicano Nation).” It sees the “bronze (Chicana/Chicano) Nation” as “a union of free pueblos” whose “cultural values strengthen our identity as La Familia de La Raza.
Following the tenets of EPEA, MEChA denounces “the brutal gringo invasion of our territories,” and it vows to “struggl[e] against the foreigner 'gabacho' [a pejorative term for an English-speaking, non-Hispanic] who exploits our riches and destroys our culture.” MEChA’s exclusionary racial attitudes are summarized in the organization’s slogan: “Por la Raza, todo. Fuera de La Raza, nada.” (“For the race, everything. Outside of the race, nothing.”)
MEChA today espouses what it calls an ideology of “Chicanismo,” wherein Chicano purity is held up as a supreme virtue that reflects “self-respect and pride [in] one's ethnic and cultural background.” The organization seeks to advance a radical ideology by promoting “Chicanismo within the community, politicizing our Raza with an emphasis on indigenous consciousness to continue the struggle for the self-determination of the Chicano people for the purpose of liberating Aztlán.”
MEChA condemns as “race traitors” those Latinos who fail to adhere to its ideological platform. In 1995, for example, Voz Fronteriza, the official publication of UC San Diego’s MEChA chapter, ran an editorial excoriating a recently deceased Latino INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) agent as one such turncoat. The piece stated that “all the migra [a pejorative term for the INS] pigs should be killed, every single one.”
By supporting continued high levels of Mexican immigration to the United States, MEChA hopes to flood the Southwestern U.S. with enough immigrants to establish a numerical majority and thereby achieve the “reconquista” which would represent the fulfillment of EPEA's credo: “Where we are a majority we will control; where we are a minority we will represent a pressure group; nationally, we represent one party: La Familia de Raza.”
Such a “reconquista” represents only the first phase of MEChA’s agenda. The next phase involves the ethnic cleansing, or expulsion, of Americans of European, African, and Asian descent out of “Aztlán.”
Today MEChA is a leading campus advocacy group for illegal immigrants. The organization supports open borders; government benefits (including the right to vote) for non-citizens; state recognition of Spanish as an official language of the U.S.; racial preferences and set-asides for Hispanics in education and corporate hiring; taxpayer-funded welfare outlays and public education for illegal aliens; and ultimately, amnesty or a path-to-citizenship for illegals.
MEChA attributes most of the problems presently afflicting Chicanos in America to the nation's allegedly ubiquitous racism. For example, the organization says: “Overall, Chicana/Chicano junior high, high school and college pushout rates have risen since 1969, forcing many Chicanas and Chicanos to a life of poverty. These factors along with a growing right wing trend in the nation are combining to work greater hardships on Chicanas and Chicanos. New repressive and racist immigration laws are continuously directed at our Gente [People].” To address these trends, MEChA is “committed to ending the cultural tyranny suffered at the hands of institutional and systematic discrimination that holds our Gente captive,” and to put an “end to oppression and exploitation of the Chicano/Chicana community.”
Its violent language about America’s alleged anti Hispanic bigotry has made MEChA a potent force on school campuses nationwide: the organization boasts hundreds of chapters in universities across the United States. It has also established a number of chapters in public high schools, routinely encouraging its young supporters to participate in political protests and marches. Like so many of its comrades on the left, MEChA has become expert in dressing up its own vile racism as a commitment to a nebulous something-or-other called “social justice.”

John Perazzo is the managing editor of DiscoverTheNetworks.org. Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266040/cultivating-new-generation-racists-campus-john-perazzo Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

-- the
College maintains it is abusive to promote this ideology, first and
foremost for the well-being of the gender dysphoric children themselves

All the way back in August 2016, the American College of Pediatricians took a brave stand and proclaimed that gender ideology harms children. They updated their post in January of this year, and it must not go unnoticed.

They write (emphasis added):

The bottom line is this: Our opponents advocate a new scientifically baseless standard of care for children with a psychological condition (GD) that would otherwise resolve after puberty for the vast majority of patients concerned. Specifically, they advise: affirmation of children’s thoughts which are contrary to physical reality; the chemical castration of these children prior to puberty with GnRH agonists (puberty blockers which cause infertility, stunted growth, low bone density, and an unknown impact upon their brain development), and, finally, the permanent sterilization of these children prior to age 18 via cross-sex hormones. There is an obvious self-fulfilling nature to encouraging young GD children to impersonate the opposite sex and then institute pubertal suppression. If a boy who questions whether or not he is a boy (who is meant to grow into a man) is treated as a girl, then has his natural pubertal progression to manhood suppressed, have we not set in motion an inevitable outcome? All of his same sex peers develop into young men, his opposite sex friends develop into young women, but he remains a pre-pubertal boy. He will be left psycho-socially isolated and alone. He will be left with the psychological impression that something is wrong. He will be less able to identify with his same sex peers and being male, and thus be more likely to self identify as “non-male” or female. Moreover, neuroscience reveals that the pre-frontal cortex of the brain which is responsible for judgment and risk assessment is not mature until the mid-twenties. Never has it been more scientifically clear that children and adolescents are incapable of making informed decisions regarding permanent, irreversible and life-altering medical interventions. For this reason, the College maintains it is abusive to promote this ideology, first and foremost for the well-being of the gender dysphoric children themselves, and secondly, for all of their non-gender-discordant peers, many of whom will subsequently question their own gender identity, and face violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety.

In other words, manipulators of the education system should not promote sexual confusion at an early age. Educators should let the boys and girls develop naturally and not seize on adolescent searching by telling the kids that they are mature enough to decide these things. It is "abusive" to manipulate. It makes them face "violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety."

The college even has the courage to call it, appropriately, "gender dysphoria." Any word with the prefix dys- attached to it in today's politically correct culture is bound to attract an onslaught.

Are there any conservative radio and TV hosts out there who would like to invite one of the authors of the college's post on their shows to support them? Would anyone who reads this blog send them an email to tell them to stand strong for science and common sense?

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/03/american_college_of_pediatricians_doubles_down_on_common_sense.html Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Convicted of providing material support for terrorism, Lynne Stewart was released early so she could die peacefully at home.

After a lifetime of radical anti-American activism and passionate legal advocacy for foreign and domestic terrorists, cop-killers, and gangsters, convicted terrorist enabler Lynne Stewart died at her home in Brooklyn – instead of in prison where she was supposed to be.

Her son said Stewart, 77, expired Tuesday from complications related to cancer and a series of strokes. Mourners who run the website of “Democracy Now!” ran a headline describing her as the “People’s Lawyer & [Former] Political Prisoner.” The article called her “[a] former teacher and librarian, [who] was known as a people’s lawyer who represented the poor and revolutionaries.”

That represents only part of the life story of the self-described “radical human rights attorney” and cheerleader for totalitarianism.

This outspoken, persistent, quick-witted woman didn’t look like a zealous subversive. She may have been a bit too extreme for many liberals but they gave her a pass because, after all, her heart was in the right place. To the Left, this Maoist who said she favored “violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism, sexism, and at the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions," was an endearing, grandmotherly figure blessed with a disarming honesty.

"I'm not a pacifist,” she once said. “I have cried many bitter tears. There is death in history, and it's not all rosebuds and memorial services. Mao, Fidel [Castro], Ho Chi Minh understood this."

"I don't have any problem with Mao or Stalin or the Vietnamese leaders or certainly Fidel [Castro] locking up people they see as dangerous," Stewart told Monthly Review in 2002. "Because so often, dissidence has been used by the greater powers to undermine a people's revolution."

This lovable, folksy ball of fluff hailed the Black Lives Matter-inspired killers who gunned down police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge last year as noble freedom fighters.

“They are avengers,” Stewart said. “They spoke for some of us when they did that.”

“They are not brazen, crazed, you know, insane killers,” she said. “They are avenging deaths that are never and have never been avenged since the ’60s and ’70s.”

Stewart likened American conservatives to the theocratic totalitarians of the Islamic world who abuse women, treating them as chattel. “The American Right,” she said, “is certainly anti-woman, anti-inclusiveness, and I certainly oppose that here in my own country for my own sake, for my children’s sake, for the way I want to live.”

She was simply misunderstood.

“Belying the image of a dangerous radical,” the New York Times tearfully emoted at word of her demise, “Ms. Stewart, a short, round-faced woman, often arrived at court [for her trial in 2005] wearing a New York Mets cap and a floral-print housedress, dangling a cloth tote bag rather than the typical briefcase and inevitably drawing a clutch of news photographers.”

After being diagnosed with terminal breast cancer, Stewart was released early from prison in January 2014 by a sentimental Clinton-appointed judge at the request of the Obama administration. She was supposed to stay caged until 2018.

Her passing came 18 days after the behind-bars death of her most prized client, the 78-year-old convicted Islamic terrorist ringleader Omar Abdel-Rahman, also known as the Blind Sheikh, with whom she used to flirt during prison visits. He had received a sentence of life imprisonment in 1996.

“He was a personification of an American hero,” she told the Times after Abdel-Rahman departed. “I feel very strongly that he suffered. He suffered unjustly because he was convicted of this bogus crime.”

In 2003 Stewart called Rahman "a world figure, someone who was listened to by the entire Muslim population for being a very learned scholar, [who] deserved to have a platform, deserved not to be entombed in the middle of America and not able to speak."

In 2002, Stewart praised Islamic militants as “forces of national liberation,” adding that “Islamic revolution” was “the only hope” for the peoples of Egypt, Jordan, the Gulf states, and Saudi Arabia. “If their people see that they want to reinstate a system of law [Sharia] and government that was in existence for hundreds and hundreds of years, I’m not going to judge.”

The same year she said that on 9/11 the Pentagon was "a better target" than the World Trade Center, because those in the towers "never knew what hit them. They had no idea that they could ever be a target for somebody's wrath, just by virtue of being American. They took it personally. And actually, it wasn't a personal thing."

But Stewart’s work for her infamous client was her undoing. In 2005 she was convicted in federal court in Manhattan of providing material support for terrorism.

While acting as legal counsel to Abdel-Rahman she violated a national security-related gag order by relaying a message from her client who was convicted of masterminding the 1993 World Trade Center bombing in which six people were killed and more than a thousand wounded. The communiqué, from a prisoner who was held incommunicado specifically to prevent him from directing terrorist activities from his prison cell, was “the blessing of a return to violence from a terrorist leader,” prosecutor Anthony Barkow said. In the message, Abdel-Rahman urged his disciples in Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (in English, Islamic Group), to abandon a ceasefire with the government of Egypt and resume terrorist operations.

Prosecutors said he waged a “war of urban terrorism” aimed at pushing the U.S. to withdraw its support for Israel and Egypt. One of his followers, El Sayed Nosair, was convicted in the 1990 murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane.

At his sentencing, Abdel-Rahman urged his Muslim disciples to rise up against “infidel” America. “America will go and be withered and this civilization will be destroyed,” he said. “Nothing will remain.”

Years before, he issued a fatwa linked to the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. He was a spiritual leader of al-Qaeda and other jihadist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and a symbol of holy righteousness to his followers, including deposed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.

A year after Rahman was sentenced to life in prison, terrorists from his Muslim Brotherhood splinter organization, the Islamic Group, carried out the Luxor Massacre in Egypt. European tourists had their ears and noses cut off before being killed. The attack had been carried out to take hostages to exchange for Lynne Stewart’s client [i.e. Abdel-Rahman]. A note calling for the release of Rahman was found in a disemboweled body.

At Stewart’s trial for serving as a terrorist’s mouthpiece, prosecutors said she made loud noises when visiting her client so guards wouldn’t notice that she was acting as a go-between. She maintained the distractions were necessary to protect attorney-client privilege.

At a 2005 rally for her criminal defense, she said, “I was so angry at the thought of what they were doing to me.”

The sheikh asked me to make this press release and we all thought it was a good idea because we felt our duty was to keep his name alive in the world, in the real world. That when somebody sinks below the level, where nobody remembers him, he’s not heard of, no one cares what happens to him, at that point, that person is, indeed, doing a death penalty, even though we call it “a life sentence.”

But I do think that I’m now facing 30 years, not because of what they accuse me of having done, which really I’m completely innocent of and they understand that, too, but really for being 30 years as a movement lawyer and for the 10 years before that, being opposed to their war in Vietnam, being opposed to the racist policies of the Board of Education of the City of New York and fighting against that and standing up for people, regardless of the circumstances, who really were designated enemies of the state.So, I’m here today, as an enemy of the state myself … But when I say “the state,” I think of myself, and I know that the tabloid press of New York, notably the New York Post, refers to me as [a] “traitor lawyer.” And that, to me, is not at all true. I think that I’m a greater patriot because I didn’t just come out in the sunshine and when it was good weather but I came out when it was bad weather, and when things were very, very much at a low ebb and I spoke up and I said what had to be said, and I continued with my work and I defended the people who needed defense. That was my job, that’s what I did.

The Left likes to refer to some of its legal heroes like Stewart and Sixties icon William Kunstler as “People’s Lawyers.” It’s not what you might think.

A “People’s Lawyer” – the phrase is always capitalized – is a crusading, small-c communist attorney who devotes his life to using the legal system to fundamentally transform America. As such it is a profoundly antisocial, un-American concept.

It is embraced by the communist-dominated National Lawyers Guild (NLG). The NLG states that it was founded in 1937 “on the principle to unite the lawyers, law students, legal workers and jailhouse lawyers to function as an effective force in the service of the people, to the end that human rights shall be regarded as more sacred than property interests.”

Guild members reject the wisdom James Madison imparted in his 1792 essay titled "Property." Madison argued that individual rights are inseparable from property.

Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions. Where there is an excess of liberty, the effect is the same, tho' from an opposite cause. Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.

The Guild-affiliated People’s Law Office in Chicago, which goes by the fitting acronym PLO, brags of its efforts on behalf of the supposedly downtrodden against the system. “We have defended activists who have been targeted as a result of their political beliefs or organizing efforts on behalf of movements struggling for social justice and liberation,” its website states.

If Stewart had lived in the Windy City, she could easily have landed a job with the PLO given her defense of America’s most aggressive social justice warriors.

Stewart acted as defense counsel for Weather Underground bomber and cop-killer Kathy Boudin, airline-hijacking Black Panther Willie Holder, and Mafia turncoat Sammy "The Bull" Gravano. She said that, if given the opportunity, she would have defended Osama bin Laden. Long a love object of the Guantanamo-emptying Center for Constitutional Rights, she once referred to the 9/11 terrorist attacks as an example of “armed struggle.”

She was choosy in selecting clients.

"There are a lot of people I wouldn't represent," Stewart said in a 2002 interview with World War 3 Report, a Marxist magazine. "I wouldn't represent [Charles] Schwarz, the cop who supposedly held [New York City police torture victim Abner] Louima down [in 1997]. I don't represent people who are accused of hurting children in any way, either sexually or violently. I wouldn't take a Nazi case, or an Aryan case.”

“If I can't give it my heart and soul, I won't represent somebody,” she said.

“My politics are those of inclusion, and I hope that my politics are represented in the people I actually represent."

The once-noble American Friends Service Committee has embraced an ignoble cause.

Originally published under the title "The Nature of Quaker Education."

The Quakers have evolved over the years from opposing war to opposing Israel's existence.

Unwittingly,
Friends' Central School in Wynnewood, PA, a well-regarded Quaker
establishment, has once again come under fire for its ties to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement supported by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC).

The
school operates in accordance with the Quaker philosophy of
"simplicity, peace, integrity, community, equality and stewardship.
Underlying all facets of School life is the belief that 'there is that
of God in everyone.' Meeting for Worship is central, providing time for
connections among members of the community and between individuals and
their spiritual sources. Peaceful resolution of conflicts, seeking truth
and collaboration are key aspects of a Friends' Central education."

The
Quakers have cultivated their image as peaceful and supremely benign.
Few suspect, much less know, that one of their central missions is
promoting the BDS movement that opposes Israel's existence.

The
Quaker experience in the Middle East was unique; they provided relief
to Palestinian refugees in 1949-1950 but withdrew after the United
Nations took over. The Friends also spearheaded religious diplomacy
about the fate of Jerusalem, which was besieged and divided during the
war of 1948. Though the mission was unsuccessful, and Jerusalem would
remain divided until 1967, their efforts were characterized by the
scrupulous evenhandedness and appeals to the religious sensibilities of
Christians, Muslims and Jews.

The Quakers play a leading role supporting BDS on university campuses.

Building
on this and a long history of opposing Israel, it is no surprise that
the AFSC is one of the leading organizations supporting BDS on
university campuses and through support to various groups like Students
for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace, which spearhead the
movement.

Enter
Sa'ed Atshan, an assistant professor of peace and conflict studies at
Swarthmore College who is also, not surprisingly, a well-known advocate
for BDS. Atshan had been set to appear at Friends' Central but his talk
was canceled after his BDS ties were exposed to the administration by
parents who found the scheduled presentation to be biased and one-sided.

Atshan
has also been active with SJP, whose parent organization, American
Muslims for Palestine, was recently shown to be connected to the same
American Muslim Brotherhood supporters who funded Hamas through the Holy
Land Foundation, and which has trained its activists in "Countering
Normalization of Israeli Oppression on Campus."

Atshan
is a poster child for Quaker education, an alum of the Quaker school in
Ramallah who now teaches for the same Quaker school he attended as an
undergraduate. In many regards, he represents the Quaker echo chamber
regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that ensures that only the
Palestinian narrative will be voiced.

Predictably,
once Atshan's appearance was canceled, students protested; some
expressed their "disappointment and dismay" while others walked out of
the meeting after the announcement. Jewish students and parents will
thus bear the blame for the cancellation. But the fact is that they fell
into a not very clever trap: Either shut up and accept a biased
speaker, or protest and take the heat, whether the talk was canceled or
not. This is one of the basic tricks of the BDS movement.

In
turn, this incident will undoubtedly transform into a conversation on
free speech and academic freedom but pedagogically, the bigger concern
is that pro-BDS individuals who use hate and racist speech will use and
abuse academic freedom, whether it is academic or not.

This
freedom to critique is, predictably, directed mostly at the twin
Satans, Israel and America, although efforts to curtail speech that
academics find unpleasant and unacceptable have been longstanding in the
form of "speech codes" and restrictions on "hate speech." Clearly
academic freedom is a one-way street; only those having the correct
opinions may claim it.

Historically,
the AFSC has adopted a hypocritical form of pacifism. It claims to
oppose violence, but in practice engages in apologetics for terrorism.
It claims to want peace for both sides, but inevitably advocates only
for the Palestinians, often in extremist terms. And it has moved closer
and closer to a retrograde, supersessionist theology that has been the
basis of Christian anti-Semitism for centuries.

The once-noble American Friends Service Committee has embraced an ignoble cause.

The
AFSC's relationship to Israel is tragic; a once-noble organization has
not only embraced an ignoble cause, but has betrayed its own founding
principles in the process.

The
AFSC appears to regard its support for the BDS movement as righteous.
As it puts it, its advocacy of BDS is "contextualized by Quakers and
AFSC's long support for boycotts, divestment and sanctions as economic
tactics that appeal to human conscience and change behavior," relating
this to its opposition to slavery, segregation, apartheid and other
reprehensible phenomena.

But
it also betrays itself by claiming to support, in accordance with its
"principles and history," all "nonviolent efforts to realize peace and
justice in Israel and Palestine," even though this is demonstrably not
the case, and has not been for years, given its support for Palestinian
groups that both advocate and practice extreme forms of violence.

Many
Jewish parents send their children to Quaker schools seeking to instill
values they find analogous to those represented by Judaism, especially
since the Quakers and their schools have substituted "social justice"
for traditional liturgy. But Jewish parents should be encouraged to do
more research on the Quaker approach and then decide whether Jewish
values and Quaker values, as they exist today, are the same.

Asaf Romirowskyis the executive director of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.Source: http://www.meforum.org/6566/from-noble-to-ignoble-quaker-relations-with-israel Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.